๐ณ๐ฑ
So I've been thinking how we could sanely modify groups here at QOTO all day. Closest we have right now in the fediverse is gup.pe which does a pretty good job but the problem is there is no moderation. Anyone can join a group or post to a group and there is no way to exclude bad actors. Its completely automated no moderator.
I think if I were to fork the source code and get it working it would be pretty trivial to make it into a working framework. Just design it so whoever first creates a group is the owner. They can give others privilages or take it away, as well as ban people via remote commands.
Not sure if i have the time to take on that project but it wouldnt be more than a few days work.
I guess the real question is... how desperate are the people on #QOTO for groups? Would it even be worth my time?
@sozialwelten I dont think it would be easy to integrate into mastodon itself. I would likely need to fork Gup.pe in which case it would exist as its own instance and used by external users much like gup.pe would be used.
@freemo Ah! Just from a quick look it reminds me of moderated groups on instagram for sharing works from professional photographers. I could imagine using groups for very specific common interests. Like a python group or similar.
@sozialwelten Id much prefer a built-in solution in mastodon but I'm not sure eugene has any plans for that. He seems dead set on just mimicing twitter and it seems intentional. So this seems like the best compromise I can think of that would be quick to develop
@freemo
I think adding control and administration features to Guppe Groups would be excellent, right now it seems to be fully functional but there's no way to stop spamming or block any bad content.
Alex wrote a Blog post about Guppe and he mentioned the moderation problem, along with some suggestions -- including the First User becoming the group owner.
https://alexschroeder.ch/wiki/2019-09-26_Groups_on_Mastodon
Having Groups working would benefit users in many instances, not just Qoto. So if you do have some ideas and the time to work on it, it's a nice project.
I have ideas, but not the time. But I am an exceptionally fast programmer so if I am convinced to devote 2 or 3 days to it i could probably have all the functionality in place. Sadly that time is kind of critical to me right now so I'll only do it if it doesnt appear that the feature is going to be implemented by anyone else in the near future.
@freemo I think qoto would be an excellent case study that probably would only be copied it already turned out to have been a great success. That probably would be enough time to not being considered "the near future". @design_RG
Much like gup.pe the solution im considering wouldnt need to be replicated by anyone else. In theory people from any instance could use the solution remotely.
What I am considering is basically a stand-alone fork og Gup.pe with more features.
You could maybe send a DM to William and ask what his plans are for additional work in the Guppe project? He's at @ datatitian@social.coop
Thanks.
Hey @datatitian any plans in the immediate future to implement permissions and ownership schemes in gup.pe? Only asking so I can decide if it makes sense to fork the project and add it in a fork or if it makes sense to wait if its on your plans
@freemo @design_RG @sozialwelten
my focus right now is modularizing the NodeJS ActivityPub implementation that I created for @GuppeGroups and implementing the rest of the spec so it can be used to build other apps, e.g. events. https://github.com/wmurphyrd/activitypub-express
So, not likely to make any progress on Guppe soon, but forks and other instances are highly encouraged ๐
@freemo Could this be achieved by a bot from within Mastodon? I'm thinking something like ChanServ on IRC networks, crossed with mailing-list forwarding.
You'd send, for instance:
(a)groups CREATE Moderators
(a)groups ADD Moderators (a)arteteco (a)design_RG (a)mngrif (a)surasanji
Each step can give you a confirmation that the group name wasn't in use, that the bot could find the named user to add, that you had the right permissions, etc.
Now you send:
(a)groups TO Moderators Hi, fellow mods!
The bot messages all group members, copying the privacy settings of your TO toot:
(a)arteteco (a)design_RG (a)mngrif (a)surasanji
(a)freemo said to Moderators,
Hi, fellow mods!
Later on you could send:
(a)groups REMOVE Moderators (a)surasanji
if you don't want that user to be part of the group anymore.
The bot might also implement commands like MUTE/UNMUTE
to restrict certain members from using TO,
PRIVILEGE/UNPRIVILEGE
to invest other members with op status,
OPEN/CLOSE
to enable self-service enrolment,
LEAVE/JOIN
to use self-service enrolment in an open group.
I've used (a) to avoid tagging and annoying my example users; it's meant to represent @ though.
โClosest we have right now in the fediverse is gup.pe which does a pretty good job but the problem is there is no moderation. Anyone can join a group or post to a group and there is no way to exclude bad actors. Its completely automated no moderator.โ
My fediverse software has moderated groups.
@mike This was a reference to mastodon and mastodon derivatives. There are other servers with local groups but they arent compatible with the bulk of the fediverse. Thus the need for a universal solution everyone can use.
@mike Groups are not compatible with most of those no
@freemo Sound like a nice feature which might even profit someone on a different instance. How about patching it upstream? Might be worth exploring.